@Dave S, The pot issue and the IRS. Without the pot convictions and jail terms, the prison industrial complex (PIC) takes a big hit. We all know that the Feds won’t let that happen, one way or the other. While the tax law should be fixed, that’s unlikely, even with a Republican run Congress. They all benefit from the PIC. They don’t have to be concerned about making people stupid, the Liberal education system and the Lame Stream Media is doing just fine at that.

The whole system needs to go. This recent discussion is just another example of how people are being violated by default.

With legal marijuana dealers as is in the case of those represented in V’s article, the tax system/IRS is like the drug pimp getting all the money, and the PIC/judicial system is the racketeering strong arm of the IRS. Nonviolent marijuana market people are tax slaves or do prison terms so men in suits can have more power and bigger yachts, all justified by one group of people voting to pick on another group of people via government force.

It’s bullshit.

The whole mess could be easily avoided simply by decriminalizing and not regulating it. The marijuana trade would be reduced to something comparable to common fruits and vegetables.

It’s a mess. Another set of contradictions within the framework of law. ..set up to benefit the powers to be.

The value is set by supply/demand, the demand of which is artificially inflated by limiting the supply and creating a risk via prohibition. For personal use, if it were as legal as tomatoes, it would have the same economic value as tomatoes.

(The industrial value is great for things like textiles, extracts, etc, etc..)

Consider this;

You can grow 3 – 6 female plants around your house patio, yard etc, in 5 gallon containers, or similar to the way you would grow tomatoes or a house plant, each yielding about 1/3 – 3/4 pound or more of processed buds. That is a couple of large freezer bags stuffed with weed for virtually no investment to produce. It is enough for you and your husband to share a joint or two every day for the next year or more.

For people who are not into growing their own, there are people who will still grow it and process it to be sold in places like liquor stores and tobacco shops, or as it is now through social networks. I suspect there would also be a lot of people giving away extras from their home gardens.

If it were decriminalized and not regulated, the value would drop. The whole issue would disappear.

The best the people in your article can do is to go black market, and benefit from the artificially inflated value.

Interesting thing on CNN a little while ago. I was channel surfing trying to find something non political when a sub title caught my eye. Progressive movement to eliminate the mid term elections….so I left it there for a bit. It was hard to do because Pelosi was on it but, what the hell….

The gist of the whole story was that there should be NO midterm elections because that is the “white man’s” power grab. It also said that the voting age should be lowered to 16. But the most interesting part of the story was the insistence (supposedly backed by the New York Times) that voting become mandatory and if you do not vote…..just like the ACA….non participation is a fine.

When they asked Pelosi about it, she said….that some of those things have great merit but that she would add….that you do not have to be a citizen to vote.

Sorry to say this, but the only thing that will fix the Fed’s is absolute elimination. Then start over with some new rules. Since I’m a barbarian too 🙂 I think maybe all Progressives should be lined up and executed (or we could ship them to ISIS and let them figure it out). 😀

Yes we did! Burke was a very weak candidate. She really was fired by Trek – my daughter works there and knew her leaving the company was not on good terms. The hate for Walker is strong though. People don’t understand that he actually saved the public employees pension. Union propaganda is all they know. Actual logic and thinking for themselves is just non-existent. It still amazes me sometimes. But yes, 4 more years to get more things corrected in this state. I really hope he does not run for President in ’16. Too much to do here.

1. The Dems apparently started eating their own a couple months back. But somehow this just didn’t get discovered by anyone in the media. Except they have the material ready to go before the election is even over.

2. Look at all that “confidential” stuff that is now being made public. And of course it was known by the media for months, yet never reported.

3. Which makes one wonder what the story would be if the Dems had prevailed!

4. When the newbies arrive in D.C. they will be reminded that they owe their success to the Republican Machine. Their first task will be to make phone calls to get donations, to replenish the RNC war chest.

All State Houses went Republican. Wendy Davis goes down by 19 or 20 points….she blames the defeat partly upon the Hispanic vote and the fact that the Hispanic culture is macho and females are not first class citizens…..her words. ( But it is true ).

EVEN In blue enclave Austin, Republican judges were elected. The down ballot races also went mostly Republican….

Actually, I should use the term conservative because a liberal republican got beat because of his ant gun stance……AN ANTI GUN STANCE IN TEXAS and he wonders why he got beat…..

One of the bigger issues that awakened Texas voters was also the Houston mayor and her assault on the pulpit…..but it was more than the pulpit…..it was a democrat mayor that was using her office and the city attorney to shut up opposition to her policies….that did not fly at all….you do not suppress free speech at anytime in Texas for any reason. She won the mayor position with 13 percent of the voters….She is an outspoken LGBT person and she has hurt the LGBT cause by using her position. Texans do not care about gays or LGBT….until you use a position to further your agenda. She will be gone on the next mayoral election.

Question…..mainly for the JACster…..What is your opinion on the election of conservative governors in blue states? I believe I heard that 32 of 50 governors are conservative…..Texas and Wisconsin and a couple of other states have shown how state’s can control their own future if not tied to the Feds. ( Not taking Federal money with strings )….perhaps it is resonating?

Good morning Sir. Sanity still rules in part of the Republic, at least for now.

I don’t believe the Gov races are a validation of “conservative” in the true sense. Conservative in the fiscal sense probably. However, it is not an endorsement of the go it alone on health care either.

Not all the R Governors have rejected the ACA Medicaid mandate. So I think you have to look at each state to figure out what, if anything, is going on regarding trends.

I do think that the DNC overplayed the racist/misogynist/etc. tactic. In close races the Dems, even locally, started throwing the FEAR tactics at their R opponent. I don’t know that it hurt them but it did not help with many.

In some states it may be a turnout issue, in others the character of those running and/or the mood of the electorate.

I do think that the Gov races may represent a REJECTION of the more hard core left wing agenda and rhetoric. Which goes to the hate and fear tactic. There is something that has been missed by the media and the self love of the Progressives these past few years.

The Nation was moving slightly Republican at the state level until Bush created the window for Obama. And then there is the Rock Star/Messiah affect of Obama himself. His youth and oratory skills, talking out of both sides of his mouth, combined with a new wave of young voters and disenfranchised Black voters, made him the ultimate POPULIST candidate.

But that “aura” does not extend to others in the Dem party. The Progressives are struggling to stick Warren with the “aura”, but I am not sure it will work again. Americans way have woke up to the hangover created by Celebrity Populism. We may be in for a period of pragmatic voting. That is except in certain parts of the country. Like Cook County, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin.

Given the dislike for Scott in Florida I have to believe that a “moderate” Democrat who had been a Democrat for a long time, would have prevailed. Crist’s jumping parties to stay in power probably still costs him votes. Especially among the independents.

In Idaho I don’t think Jesus Christ himself could be elected Governor if he had Democrat next to his name. In California the same would hold if he were a Republican.

Now I would like to address what I am sure will be the Dem meme about “turnout”.

They will point to total turnout during the 2008 and 2012 elections and compare those to the disastrous midterms in 2010 and now 2014. I figured one place this should really show up is in Wisconsin. So I did some digging.

If we compare POTUS turnout in 2012 to Gov turnout in 2014 we have a drop in Total number of voters from 3,055,484 to 2,395,963, or 659,521 FEWER voters.

Ah, but not so fast. What is the “recent history for only the Governors race”?

2012 was the largest voter turnout for Governor in the States history. So we see that the “turnout” for the Governors race was actually HIGHER in 2014 than when Walker won in 2010. Walker won each election with almost the same margin (52.3% in 2010, 53.1% in 2012 and 52.3% in 2014). Which means that the Dem got more votes as well. What we cannot tell is if there was a drop in “dedicated” Dem voters. I am assuming that the increase in turnout is evenly spread among party loyalty. Conclusion? Obama did not cost the Dem the Governors seat in Wisconsin. Walker won it in an otherwise normal race.

Now lets look at Illinois, where the Governor was a switch.

Total votes for Governor: 2010 = 3,729,989
2014 = 3,464,622

A DROP of 265,367 votes for Governor from 2010 to 2014. The Dem won in 2010 with only 46.8% of the vote while the Rep won in 2014 with 50.7% of the vote. This would indicate that the loss in total votes was very heavy to the Dem. side.

So I compared Cook County, Illinois total votes for POTUS in 2012 to the Governors in 2014.

Cook County provided 1,439,123 votes for Obama in 2012 and 479,204 for Romney.
Cook County provided 809,242 votes for the Dem in 2014 and 420,362 for the Rep.

Note how close the Romney 2012 and Rep. 2014 are in total, less than 50,000 difference. A reasonable expectation I would think for a non Presidential election.

But the Dem got 629,000 FEWER votes, in Cook County, in 2014 than Obama did in 2012.

In 2012 Obama won Illinois by 826,695 votes, his margin in Cook County was +959,919.

Conclusion? Obama may have damaged the Black turnout in Cook County and thus cost the Democrats the Governorship. I say MAYBE. So far the 2014 results show the Black vote going around 90% to the Dem candidates. So if the Black turnout was significantly lower in high population areas then turnout was a factor.

I don’t have the demographic breakdown yet so we can’t tell for sure. But the above shows how the situation is not necessarily the same for all states. CAUTION should be taken in trying to assess the “mood” of the electorate across the country.

The only thing that seems consistent is everyone’s dissatisfaction with incumbents. Yet once again they sent most of the incumbents back to D.C. I think this is due to two reasons.

One, those who are active know that an incumbent can bring home the cookies.

Two, lack of real choices with new candidates who are not off the rails on either the right or left side. When faced with yuk, voters go for the yuk they know.

Then you have this “Brokaw; The question then is what are they prepared to give to the Democrats to meet them at middle ground?” And Chris Matthews; “Dems Needs To Stop Being ‘Hard Left’ And ‘Get Some Things Done’ ” Really Chris.

And I really have to wonder how the Dems. are feeling about the 51 votes is enough for the majority party to do whatever they want to do. Wonder how they feel about all those arguments they made about the minority party should sit down, shut up and not be the party of no. WE WON remember those words-well you lost this time and we will lose again in the future-so really people shouldn’t our laws and system be respected and followed instead of twisted and raped for the benefit of either temporary power in power.

But just keep your eye on the media. It will suddenly be forgotten how that all came about. The demand will be to go back to the old way, to give the Dems a voice, to be inclusive……Ahh do they have the cojones for it?

Personally, announce that you will go back to the old way in exactly two years. That is fair!

Off the top of my head and not yet having my second cup of coffee, three disappointments with yesterday. Brown, the carpetbagger in NH could not overcome that. Of course, if I were him I would have stressed Hillary in NY and for the older folk RFK in New York. Probably should have thrown more roots in state sooner too.

In NY State, the non-existant Republican Party ran Rob Astorino, a great candidate and then ignored him. At the insistence of the locals, the national Party ignored him too. To his everlasting shame, Chris Christie not only ignored him but looked as if he was endorsing Cuomo. Cuomo was about as vulnerable as they come with the scandals and, as in Maryland, could have been taken out by a well financed, well run, supported campaign. Cuomo, that SOB will be back to haunt the GOP. To get biblical, he IS the Anti-Christ to Obama’s John the Baptist! Of course, he may get indicted but, one can only hope.

In NJ, the almost as dead as NY GOP blew an opportunity to take out Cory Booker. I see Booker as no future threat to anyone. Like other past NJ Senators he will just sit there in DC, chase girls get rich and do nothing for the next 20 years or so. As the “Great Black Hope” for Newark, he was MIA. Coming in with great promise, doing some very flashy stuff and then departing without completing even one term. Of course the Repubs ran a real winner this time, Jeff Bell. His entire campaign, I swear to God, consisted of pushing for a return to the Gold Standard. Regardless of the merits of that position, at first I thought his commercials were parodies by democrats. When I realized he was serious, I discovered just how bad the party is here in NJ.

Now to quote Rush yesterday, “let’s just see how long it takes for the Republicans to act as if they lost .”.

I’m taking the day to be happy about our win. Reid just lost his job, Wendy Davis and Sandra Fluke lost, a lot of democrats were removed from power and Tenn. Amendment 1 passed. Good things all-will worry about all the rest tomorrow.

What exactly does caucusing with mean-I always thought it just meant he was a democrat with an independent label?

Maine Sen. Angus King to hold press conference at 3:30 ET to discuss which party he’ll caucus with
posted at 2:01 pm on November 5, 2014 by Allahpundit

Looks like Dan Sullivan from Alaska is going to end up being Republican senator number 53, with Bill Cassidy hopefully to follow as number 54 next month in Louisiana.

Is Angus King number 55?

He was telling everyone who’d listen last night that he’s open to caucusing with the GOP if they retook the Senate. That appears to be his Plan B. Plan A was (or is?) to organize some sort of independent/centrist caucus in the Senate that would serve as a balance of power between the two parties. Er, why would any Republican moderate want to join a caucus like that now that they’re back in charge, knowing that it might cost them committee chairmanships to do so?

It’s one thing to switch parties, as Joe Manchin might conceivably do. That would indicate a commitment to one’s new caucus that would, presumably, persist even if the other party takes the Senate back in 2016. There’s value in that. What would the GOP get, though, from accepting King into the fold and handing him some plum committee slots, with no assurance that he wouldn’t turn around and caucus with Democrats again two years from now? It’d be one thing if they were sitting at 59 votes and he was promising to be the 60th vote for cloture on all bills supported by the leadership, but even with 55 seats Republicans would be nowhere near that. In which case, why would they care if King wants to caucus with them? What’s he offering here? Stay tuned. He’s going to speak at 3:30.

Update: If Sullivan and Cassidy win and King and Manchin both agree to caucus with the GOP, now you’re at 56 seats. The closer you get to 60, the more attractive it is to add indies and centrist Democrats to your caucus. But, er, there are no indies and centrist Democrats left after these two, right? All the red-state Democrats lost last night!

Update: Would this make it worthwhile for the GOP?

King’s vote won’t matter to cloture but it might matter to passing bills out of committee if there are defections among the Republican members.

Today I found myself defending … George W. Bush? Well, not really … but here it is:

Now that the GOP has bushwacked the electorate, we’re hearing about the accomplishments of the Obama administration and how the Democrats ran away from them … I always find this stuff interesting … the same was said about the accomplishments of Bill Clinton after he was gone … and Reagan after he was gone … frankly, I’m baffled. I don’t see much in the way of accomplishments in any of the three Presidents mentioned above … in fact, I see many more blunders (or successes, if you want to think that destroying Labor Unions (Reagan’s union busting) was a good thing, taking food from the mouths of the needy (Clinton’s welfare reform) … or standing by and watching unions you promised you’d picket with get slaughtered more than once in the same state (Obama neglect of municipal unions in Wisconsin) … I won’t bother listing the Hope and Change(s) we never really came close to achieving … or how the ACA is also responsible for insurance companies having 30,000,000 more customers (rather than the single payer system we need). We’ve also become drone strike and frack happy under Obama … and I don’t think anybody wants to challenge the stock market success under this “socialist” president.

Socialist my ass.

His outsourcing the website (and screwing that up royally) to friends of his wife isn’t something to be proud of either. The list can go on, but I’m doing my best to remain unheated (i.e., cool?). I’m sure Mr. Obama is a smart and compassionate man, but sanctifying his incompetence isn’t being honest. He’s done a lot more for Wall Street (see the Mike Taibi article in Rolling Stone that states Bush was “hands down” tougher on Wall Street banks than Obama) than he has for the poor and middle class (which are pretty much one in the same now).

Those of us who were duped into voting for George W. Bush (after feeling completely deserted by Slick Willy Clinton and his hard and fast turn to the right during his second term) feel bad enough about our voting (at all), but we don’t feel stupid. We felt duped … but feel free to call us stupid. I mean, if it makes you feel better … about yourself?

I have to wonder how many Democrats can admit the same thing about voting for Mr. Obama. Hope and Change didn’t work out so well, you ask me. In fact, it looks more like the same … (i.e., the last guy’s fuck-ups). In fact, that lack of “change” between the two presidencies, especially as regards Wall Street, makes me call Obama’s Presidency Bush III and IV). He said the right things, but that’s about it. The majority of his campaign promises remain just that, promises … some of them out and out abandoned (like walking union picket lines/Guantanamo/tax breaks for the rich, etc.). If you’re going to claim he “saved” the auto industry, then Bush “saved” the economy with his bailouts (which came before Obama gave away the other half of the store). You can go back and forth, and Lord knows I don’t want to defend George W. Bush, but let’s not kid ourselves about any of these characters. They can’t get to the top spot without selling out somewhere along the line. Since Citizens United, the sellouts are way more encompassing. There’s one person unwilling to take a dime from any corporation (Bernie Sanders), but should he try to run, he’ll be shoved aside by the same lesser of two evils political party that now wishes to make believe the Obama Presidency was a success. It hasn’t been, and should he decide to affect his legacy with victories (of sorts) and join hands with the Republican majority Congress, it’ll be even worse. He should wave that veto like the Star Wars dude and keep the Republicans grumbling amongst themselves for the next two years. He shouldn’t give an inch on anything that will harm the poor and middle classes he was supposed to protect.

Notice I didn’t mention Benghazi?

And yes, he should pick a pair of the “comfortable shoes” so many sent him and join the next fucking union picket line, wherever it forms.

Seriously, I agree the Dems are the lesser of two evils, but enough with the platitudes about Obama’s accomplishments. They are few and far between the fuck-ups … and where there was progress (the ACA), it was half-assed at best (not enough) and completely mismanaged (including the website rollout) …

So why not calm your jets and enjoy the fiasco that will begin in just a few more weeks/months … the Presidential hijinks pitting the Tea Party against the establishment GOP and the Democrats against the only two actual liberals who “may” run for office – Bernie Sanders and/or Elizabeth Warren. In the end it’ll probably be Queen Hillary (the former Goldwater Girl) who will sail on the political winds of the moment the way she and her husband always have.

And if she wins and turns out to be another Republican in drag, yous can sanctify her too.

You are quite correct and never could figure out the hype around this administration….the only people that did good………………..Wall Street and the insurance companies.

The very people he was saying he was going to help….got slammed yet again.

How are you my intrepid friend? Things going well in Casa Stella and Pluto? Stay in touch, please sir…you and I can converse in civil terms….even if you are full of Plutonian dust mites…..luv ya man…..say HEY to your casa…..

I’m down 89 pound since March 5th (the infamous Callahan trade from the Rangers to Tampa Bay Lightning) … I’m a Tampa fan now … even my Buffalo Bills are kind of cooperating (although we’re waiting for the floor to drop) … Pluto is wild this time of the year … much angst from my Democratic friends … I refuse to call them liberal because they refuse to move to Pluto!

Hey Charlie, Best wishes to you and yours 🙂 Politics hasn’t changed one wit, just the faces. Too busy deer hunting to really worry much about it. Obama has been a clusterf*#k since day one and he won’t change. He may have single handedly destroyed the Progressive movement for years to come. He has at least done that well, not to mention he’s been the best thing to happen to gun stores and the 2nd Amendment crowd, EVER!

Deer hunting has gone very well, Pops (still at it at 73 and on O2) has one and I have whacked two since the beginning of October. Really bad weather at the moment, hopefully it will clear out enough for an evening hunt (saw a wallhanger last night, just out of bow range).

Other than that, all is quiet in the country 🙂 The freezers and shelves are full. Your Bills are playing decently so far this year, as are my Dolphins. Should be a good game upcoming between the two. Just beat the JETS and Patriots.

Charlie, back in the ’50’s there was a term, “Commie Dupe”. This is not directed at you, trust me. It is directed at the people who took the community organizer at face value.

We have talked and argued in the past about the differences between left and right, Socialist and Capitalist. We have talked about when the differences blur and Fascism is the only word that fits. I am glad to see that you know where 1600 Pennsylvania fits into the equation. Money for his boyos and pure, absolute, corrupt power for himself.

I prefer the greedy to the fanatic though, if I had my druthers, I’d tolerate neither.

“Seriously, I agree the Dems are the lesser of two evils, ”
Funny thing this am, news was saying the Dem’s wanted to work on Corporate tax rates and lowering ours so the US is more competitive with the rest of the world. The argument made was the Repug’s would not agree to Corporate alone and would demand individual tax rates be included in any measures passed. To me this read as the Dim’s would move to help WallStreet and to ‘ell with the lower & middle class…

I’m sure that you understand that the probability of any one vote truly mattering in any political election in the U.S. is practically zero.

So I suspect that you, like many other people, justify your public insistence that each vote matters as being a noble lie – a claim that, while objectively false, inspires people to perform socially beneficial actions that they would otherwise be less likely to perform.

But why assume that voting is socially beneficial?

Why assume that your lie is noble?

If you instead told the truth about voting – namely, that any voter who feels that he or she has a meaningful say in electoral outcomes is deluded – people might become less enamored of politics.

Enlightened about the reality of voting, ordinary people might come to depend more on their own trustworthy personal initiative and less on the untrustworthy initiative of power-craving strangers; depend more on the very real affections and friendships of their families and neighbors and less on the fake, theatrically proclaimed affections of politicians; and depend more on merchants and employers who must compete daily to satisfy each customer and each employee and less on politicians who compete only each electoral cycle, not to satisfy each individual, but merely to win the approval of the crowd.

I did not vote (myself) … nor did my wife (a devout Dem) … I will ONLY vote if Bernie Sanders is on the ballot … I will volunteer for him … I “might” vote for Elizabeth Warren, but I suspect she’ll back off for Queen Hillary … it could be a very scary election for my type come 2016 … a super majority Republican world … I’ll have fuel extra jet packs for Pluto!

As usual it seems, you confuse a brick – which has a purpose in making a wall ‘an economic good’ – with voting which has no purpose other than confirming violence upon your own person which is POLITICAL and not an economic good.

Because you cannot discern the difference, you pretend they are one and the same, hence your gross error.

While the weather stinks, thought I would ask what ya’ll thought the real meaning of the election results were? Me, I think it’s about Obama and the Dem narrative. People are tired of the “racist” crap and all the other lies being told daily. Obama is a true loser as President, worst ever by a long shot.

Pennsylvania elected a Democrat governor. The Republican incumbent wasn’t very good and dropped the ball on the Penn State sexual assault issue. Wolf, the new HMFIC ran on raising taxes (what else) on the oil companies that frack in Pa. His problem, the State House and Senate have Republican majorities. Between the two, they shouldn’t be able to screw things up more than they already are, thanks to the Feds.

Most of us are unhappy with our government. Drudge has headlines:
“Anti-gunners big loss”
“Environmentalists rejected”
“Clinton’s rejected”

To me, most of them play as side issues for most voters. So there is a lack of any big issue being the deciding factor. Repug’s mostly ran on overturning ObamaCare. I don’t hear much talk that that is why they won. Most races were close, so there was not a outright rejection of the Dim’s, just a slight favoritism of Repug’s or change. I think that is a trend whenever one party holds power for a period, people get tired and vote in a new bunch.

I think there should have been major deciding issues like restarting the Iraq war. But Obama and the media downplayed that. WallStreet is doing great and so is the economy, depending on how you view things. The gap between rich & poor is widening. Employment is shifting towards immigrants and part time. Everyone is waiting to see if there will be immigration reform. What should be tied to it, Ebola & enterovirus 68 is treated as a separate issue. Hurry up and wait while the media speculates.

Personally, I think the psycho president would be salivating over the opportunity to perform the role of martyr. Having said that, the GOP really cannot bring impeachment proceedings against him. While the House would vote the articles yesterday (especially if that Exec. order goes through) there are not enough votes in the Senate to remove him. After yesterday’s performance when he named himself as the president of the uninvolved (like Flag and you?) I’m starting to think that on January 20th 2017, they will have to physically drag the SOB out of the White House. Certainly, he may create a “Shadow Government” after he leaves.

It is too bad that Holder has decided to leave and I think for a reason. He would have been a wonderful target for impeachment and he knows it. The House would have moved immediately come hell or Bohner and there is enough on him that would have made conviction more likely in the Senate. The man has openly lied to congressional committees and been malfeasant to say the least in his duties.

Right now, the best way to go woudl probably to start defunding everything that is near and dear to the maximum leaders heart. The electorate has more or less demonstrated that if it can’t be done in a 10 second sound bite, they are not interested. Arguments over funding things like Obamacare, housing for the illegal “children”, and other nonsense would appear on the media radar for seconds and be immediately forgotten. Ain’t sexy, don’t know why the Republicans have not figured this one out.

A big part of what needs to be done now is convincing a good part of the electorate not to just be quiet. The newly elected legislators must be bombarded day after day with reminders of what they were elected to do. This is where the failure has been in the past. Even the most successful insurgency, Gingrich’s “Contract with America”, ultimately failed when the pressure came off the politicians. Gingrich stuck to his guns but slime like Tom Delay undermined him at every turn. the tea party leaning (maybe not members) of congress must be kept on high alert by their constituents and advised of their imminent retirement in two years if they don’t follow through and allow themselves to be seduced.

I don’t think Obama want’s any compromise on immigration. He can and has done more with executive action, ignoring the law & refusing to enforce it. Any measure passed would be too conservative for him, so better to tank the negotiations before they even start.

I think the senate should repeal every bill passed using the “nuclear option” rules. Afterwards, they should repeal that rule for the senate and go back to a 60 requirement on major legislation. This will give the Repug’s some moral high ground. It will make passing anything major difficult to impossible, but will not change things in the long run. Obama would veto anyway and then they would have to have the votes to override…..

The barriers are only partly political. The others are the lack of obvious violations of law that go beyond precedence. Remember, “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” is not defined by the Constitution. So it means whatever the politicians want it to mean.

Now if you think about the fall out of trying to Impeach Clinton you will see that Voting DOES MATTER. The move cost the R’s dearly in the next election cycle. Just as the shutting down Govt.

They learned their lesson by the voters exercising their dissatisfaction by voting. If the R’s had carried another landslide following the impeachment of Clinton and/or the shutdown of Govt we would be seeing an entirely different action by Presidents since then.

Gauging the “effectiveness” of voting by demanding that 100% of any individuals desires are achieved is a phony criteria, in my humble opinion. One needs to look at the broader movements of political viewpoints, rhetoric and then action.

Clinton went through the impeachment process, but was not impeached, a GOP failure. Although Clinton should have never been impeached to begin with (compared to Obama). That’s a different era and many of today’s conservatives demand law and order, especially with government. That hasn’t been the case and Obama should be slammed hard for what happened on his watch. The Benghazi issue and IRS being at the top of the list. Eric Holder should be in jail, period. He’s nothing short of a traitor, as is Obama.

I saw Boehner’s first presser this morning. FINALLY, some brass and hutzpah shown by the Speaker.

Twice he told the questioning press person that he “took exception to the premise of the question”, then went on and explained what was TRUE as opposed to the attempt to pull of a phony question. You know the one, “have you stopped beating your wife”? This is another “Logical Fallacy” for those that don’t realize it.

Boehner point blank told the press that he personally told Mr. Obama that if he takes unilateral action on immigration he will “poison the well and nothing will be done on immigration at all”.

Like I said, FINALLY. Speaking clearly and concisely to the press and POTUS.

It is designating which “party/group” you will throw your vote with when it comes to the rules of Congress. This includes voting for Leadership and the makeup of committees. The parties have meetings among themselves to develop political strategies. If an Indy, does not designate a caucus they would be excluded from ALL such meetings.

The system is designed to force independents to choose one party or the other. Because if they don’t they could be excluded from any committee assignments or other “insider” deals that might help their constituency.

The prostitution analogy does fit, unfortunately. The two sides will dangle many cookies, carrots and other goodies to get an independent on their side, if that single vote will make a big difference in the power structure.

This is actually a very interesting discussion-I would say it is plan B in getting religious chaplains out of the military-Plan A if memory serves was trying to make the argument that even having chaplains in the military is unconstitutional-that didn’t work so now we have “The absence of even a single Humanist chaplain impairs the religious exercise of Humanists in the Navy.” So what-now atheists are a form of religion. Such an interpretation seems to go along with the same problem I see with defining what a religion is-if we keep following this path-religious freedom will be moot because it will be basically meaningless-unless of course they want to attack religion outright-then it will suddenly have an actual REAL meaning that we all can all understand.

” Such an interpretation seems to go along with the same problem I see with defining what a religion is ”

An opinion, belief or interpretation of God, the universe?

What are the qualifiers to be a ‘Religion’?

Does it have to be accepted by a certain number of people? What exactly is that number? Why that number? Does it have to be sanctioned, bona-fide and officially approved by congress and all the religious leaders too? Who is to say whose opinion should be official? Which ‘religions’ are the ‘best’ or ‘correct’ ones?

” if we keep following this path-religious freedom will be moot because it will be basically meaningless ”

How does promoting more opinions about the universe and god and spirituality limit freedom?

“-unless of course they want to attack religion outright-then it will suddenly have an actual REAL meaning that we all can all understand. ”

Who is attacking religion? …is it the people arguing to equally engage, celebrate, express and share, or the people arguing to stifle and silence?

Why shouldn’t a humanist be a chaplain? If his god is from a scientific perspective, how does that disqualify him from legitimacy?

Does his degree in Christian Theology count for anything? Can he not counsel people who believe in a different god? How does that work when you apply that to a Jewish rabbi or a Christian priest counseling 300 sailors of varying faiths aboard a ship? What does a rabbi tell a Christian sailor when he asks about Jesus? How does a Christian priest or a Muslim Imam counsel a Jew?

“The absence of even a single ______ chaplain impairs the religious exercise of ______ in the Navy.”

What exactly is “an actual REAL meaning that we all can all understand.” ?

Atheism – lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
or in other words
“A belief there are no Gods.”

What makes a religion? A belief

There is a difference between a scientist who is NON-RELIGIOUS saying “I have no PROOF of a God” and a religious person (atheist) saying “I belief there is no God” since such a belief is based on FAITH of that system, and not on fact (or the lack of it).

Yep, I concur totally…..I do not know if there is one….I have no idea….. I simply do not know and going on blind faith is not my way. So to say that there is no god….I cannot say that. To say that there is one….I cannot say that either.

If that makes me wrong…..then I am a wrong barbarian. I can live with it.

” There is a difference between a scientist who is NON-RELIGIOUS saying “I have no PROOF of a God” and a religious person (atheist) saying “I belief there is no God” since such a belief is based on FAITH of that system, and not on fact (or the lack of it). ”

Agreed.

Not subscribing to a particular cult belief does not mean you cannot choose a set of beliefs independently.

Who says you cannot view religion from a scientific mindset and approach?

Religion and science are not necessarily in conflict, as they are both about discovery and explanation of the universe. Much of the development of religion has been about what science has not been able to explain.

And who says you cannot simply recognize all that we mere humans don’t know?

When someone asks me what religion I am, I tell them I am a ‘student’ of all of them, and that it is because I recognize my ignorance about the greater universe. I often mention that I do not feel comfortable subscribing to a particular belief as a set fact. I prefer to take the position of wonderment.

If they ask me of my god, I define it as ‘first cause’, or ‘origin of all’, ..whatever that is. The definition, the existence of all things, is proof of my ‘god’.

“Who says you cannot view religion from a scientific mindset and approach?”

The entire study of theology is based on such an approach.

Given the mind of God can be known…. (so on and so forth).

“Religion and science are not necessarily in conflict, as they are both about discovery and explanation of the universe.”

They are not in conflict because they are not at all the same. One is about fact, the other about faith.

“Much of the development of religion has been about what science has not been able to explain.”

This is called “God of the Gaps” – wherever science cannot explain, the insertion of “God’s hand” is used, which lasts until science explains it.

This is the reason the religious feel they are under attack. Wherever they profess God-of-the-Gaps, and then the gap of knowledge is eliminated, the religious feel they are in retreat – their arena of faith is reduced.

And who says you cannot simply recognize all that we mere humans don’t know?

I tell them I am a ‘student’ of all of them”

That is what I say too.

“If they ask me of my god, I define it as ‘first cause’, or ‘origin of all’, ..whatever that is. The definition, the existence of all things, is proof of my ‘god’.”

Me, too.

Godel, one of the greatest minds of had the “Theory of Incompleteness”, that any consistent system must have an unprovable truth as a premise of that system.

He applied his theory against Russel who wrote one of the world’s best sellers in philosophy “What I am not a Christian” who, among 16 complaints, attacked “First Cause” of St. Thomas Aquinas.

Russel contemplated a long while and came back and said:
“If that is your definition of God – First Cause – as established by the Theory of Incompleteness, I cannot refute it”

“God of the gaps”, while very typical, doesn’t always apply. Some religions use what is known science to induce augment or adjust a spiritual state, …things like using drugs and sound or light frequency, psychology. etc. It isn’t so much about trying to make a fairy tale fit the real world as it is trying to connect with something metaphysical.

” This is the reason the religious feel they are under attack. Wherever they profess God-of-the-Gaps, and then the gap of knowledge is eliminated, the religious feel they are in retreat – their arena of faith is reduced. ”

Of course. When you consider that billions of people have attached their egos and lives to, and built whole civilizations on a prescribed ‘god of the gaps’ (GOG), offering something antithetical can really shake things up.

So, what do you think would happen if 2-4+ billion people found out that much of what they’re taking literally is a figurative and/or metaphorical medium for encryption revealing something a bit different?

” Russel contemplated a long while and came back and said:
“If that is your definition of God – First Cause – as established by the Theory of Incompleteness, I cannot refute it” ”

It’s lock-tight, factual and unassuming, and leaves room for philosophy.

“Washington (CNN) — The U.S. Army has removed a policy that said it was acceptable to refer to black service members as a “Negro” and issued an apology Thursday, two days after CNN reported the regulation.

“The U.S. Army fully recognized, and promptly acted, to remove outdated language in Army Regulation 600-20 as soon as it was brought to our attention,” an Army spokesman said in a statement. “We apologize to anyone we offended.”

Until it was corrected, the regulation stated that “terms such as ‘Haitian’ or ‘Negro’ can be used in addition to ‘Black’ or ‘African American.'”

The new policy limits the acceptable terms to “Black or African American.”

“The Army takes pride in sustaining a culture where all personnel are treated with dignity and respect,” the Pentagon spokesman said Friday.

Sen. Tim Scott, who became the first African-American from the South elected to the Senate since Reconstruction, said Wednesday on CNN that he would reach out to the Army after learning of the report.

Lt. Col. S. Justin Platt, an Army spokesman, had said on Wednesday the use of the word comes from an outdated section.

“The racial definitions in AR600-20 para. 6-2 are outdated, currently under review, and will be updated shortly,” he said.”

Take note of that last sentence. The reference was to “racial definition” but now the term African American is acceptable.

Watched Fox this morning play a Obama sound-bite. He said on the election, to the voters, he heard you… and to the two/thirds that didn’t vote, he heard them also….
I have no ideal what he thinks he heard from the silence of non-voters, but I’m sure it’s different than the message I get. Sounds to me like they are tired of all the BullDookey. When he can’t excite his liberal base enough, maybe it’s the message he’s sending.

OK, McConnell didn’t actually say this. I am stealing this line from the greatest sports writer in American history, Jim Murray.

Murray wrote for the Los Angeles Times. If he had been a political columnist, he would be legendary.

He had no time to polish his stories. After a game, he had to phone in his column to the paper before the next day’s print run. He wrote it off the top of his head, typed it, and phoned it in. He won the award as the nation’s leading sports writer 16 times, 12 in a row.

Every time he finished a column, he leaned back in his chair and uttered this line: “Fooled ’em again.

This line should be the epitaph of American national politics. But, like a zombie, it keeps coming back, walking the streets, and eating people’s brains.

SAVED FROM THE BRINK! (AGAIN)

Senator Mitch McConnell has articulated the irrelevance of voting as no previous national political figure has in American history. He has raised the bar.

On the website of a local CBS affiliate station, this headline was run on November 4, 2014, the day of the mid-term Congressional elections: McConnell: ‘This Is A Chance To Begin To Save This Country’. McConnell had announced this the day before at a political rally. The statement was reported across the nation’s media.

McConnell is the nation’s leading Republican spokesman. He was the minority leader of the Senate on November 4, and he will be the majority leader when the new Senate takes over on January 2. November 4 made this a reality.

On November 5, after a sweeping victory of Republicans across the nation on November 4, McConnell said this: “We are not going to be shutting down the government or defaulting on the national debt. I think we ought to start with the view that maybe there are things we can agree on to make progress in this country.”

In just one day, America had moved off the railroad track to the burning trestle, and onto the excursion track, where everyone gets back safely in the afternoon. Mitch McConnell is the friendly conductor. “Tickets, please. Have your tickets ready.”

I see this as the most representative statement in the history of modern American national politics on the nature of the futility of national politics. Some people have said that politics is a choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. I have long quoted Susan Huck: national politics is a contest between Council on Foreign Relations Team A and Council on Foreign Relations Team B. McConnell has made it official.

In the rhetorical contrast between the professed magnitude of the issues on the day before a national election vs. the promise of bipartisan cooperation on the day after, I challenge anyone to find a more striking example. McConnell has articulated the reality of American national politics in these two statements.

Here is what impressed me: not merely the contrast, but the speed of the reversal. What was life-and-death for the nation on November 3 was water under the bridge on November 5. It was “let bygones be bygones.” It was “a new day dawns.” In fact, the election was “a new day yawns.”

The game goes on. So does the federal deficit. So does American foreign policy.

The NSA’s budget will not be cut — or even officially admitted. Neither will the budgets of the CIA and other intelligence agencies: $53 billion in 2013. The Federal Register will publish 75,000+ pages of fine-print rules in 2015, just as it did in 2013.

“I made a difference,” says the average voter. “My vote counted.” Yes, it did. It was counted numerically but it did not matter. Not nationally.

What is the primary function of voting? To keep voters pacified. It’s cheap insurance for Washington.

The country is now saved. But it will be threatened again in two years. Mark my words!

We’ll be fighting in the streets with our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on sit in judgment of all wrong
They decide and then the shotgun sings the song

I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again

The change, it had to come, we knew it all along
We were liberated from the fold, that’s all
And the world looks just the same and history ain’t changed
‘Cause the banners, they are flown in the next war

I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again, no no

I’ll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half alive
I’ll get all my papers and smile at the sky
Though I know that the hypnotized never lie
Do ya?

There’s nothing in the streets, looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left is now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight

I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
Don’t get fooled again, no no

Man! Been nursing a cold for several days. Tried to hang with Sparty last night. I passed out when it was 28-21 OSU. Woke up and Sparty was down by like 3 TDs, Dont know what happened when I was out, but something wasn’t clicking. Gotta hand it to OSU. they were on a mission. That one hurt though.

Did you say something about the Lions? Couldn’t hang with them today either. Just read they won. Now what were you saying? 🙂

Yep, day three of runny eyes and nose with this cold. When I get sick, my eyes run like crazy. I hate it! These teens are gonna have to find something to eat on their own, cause I’m sure not in charge..going to find my pillow and blankies and burrow into the couch for the evening.

I voted (surprise). Nothing was on the ballot that was national, just State and local, a total of 3 positions. I was happy when I was asked for my ID and said so. Not sure why it’s such a problem for the Dems, unless, they want to cheat.

on another subject, few things surprise me when it comes to Whitetail deer. When adding a safety strap to a stand this morning, there was a new buck rub and scrape within 15 yards of stand. To my amazement, the top of the rub was at my eye level (I’m 6’2). This is not a normal sized buck rub, however, we do have elk just a couple counties away. Setting up trail cam this evening and will hunt the stand the rest of week. I have seen a nice wallhanger in the area, but just not sure if it was him. The scrape had whitetail tracks within, so it must be one big bruiser. Hoping to get a glimpse in the days to come.

Well, come on to Texas, counselor, you will be asked. State ID’s are free…it is a simple process……prove citizenship and you get one…no charge. One interesting side bar……in order to receive welfare in Texas now….it requires a state ID…

However, since the enactment of the ID to vote…..for the first time in 20 years….in precincts in Houston and Austin…..the votes did not exceed the register rolls. Dead people did not vote this time….

First registered in NYC for the ’68 Presidential race. Received a voter ID card in the mail and had to show it for several years. Moved to NJ in ’77, received a voter ID in the mail and had to show it maybe once or twice. Seems around 1980, they no longer asked in either state. Wonder why?

Happy Veterans Day to all my fellow brothers and sisters. Some gave all, but all gave some! The best gift we can give the future is peace. Let our memories of hell be a lesson for future generations, maybe, just maybe, they can find peaceful solutions to issues that may lead down the path to hell. 😎

“Many secrets do get out that would not in an totalitarian society but the fact is the majority of secrets do not leak out to the American public – secrets that would of the greatest import can be kept from them reliably for decades, even if known by thousands of insiders”
– Daniel Ellsberg

I looked but somehow can’t find the original article JAC posted about this-but here’s a followup, seems Gruber has a problem with making off the cuff remarks that he’s sorry he made. Course he’s only sorry because he is finding out that what he thinks is A-okay-lying and intentionally not being transparent isn’t okay to everybody else. I also fail to see this so-called nuance. Their isn’t anything nuanced about his remarks. And the fact that he thinks the problem is that he called the voters stupid is priceless but sickening-I couldn’t give a flip what this man thinks of me-it’s the intentional underhanded manipulating of the American people to impose what this ass and his cohorts WANT that I find unforgivable and quite frankly should be grounds for a few years in jail.

I believe this is called “being disowned”. I do wonder what point they are trying to make-is it that the democrats who pushed this bill were as stupid as the voters -even with total access to the process and bill-that they either didn’t read the law or were too stupid to pick up on the “tortured way” it was written. Or maybe like King-I wanted people to have insurance- to not want people to have insurance is cruel -so everyone should just stop thinking and vote yes no matter the consequences. I suppose this means the CBO were too stupid too, although there might be rules that keep the CBO from pointing out obvious BS-wouldn’t surprise me at all.

None of this means a thing, as most of us knew it was a lie all along. The only folks who fell for the BS, were those on the Left (sorry Buck). The question we should ask, what HASN’T been a lie coming out of this Administration?

“We are going to fundamentally change America”. “The problem with the Constitution is that it is based on negative rights. It needs to be more about positive rights”.

He laid it out there for everyone to see, but most were simply blinded by their own desire for the messiah. Everything that has been said and done is completely consistent with these two proclamations.

The Obamacare lie: Basically, if they had to lie about it, it isn’t a very good deal for the people. Which has been proven true in many ways. Not sure how Buck still feels about all this, actually, those on the left have been rather quiet for quite some time, maybe they have realized we were right all along 🙂

You only have to read and listen to the MSM and other outlets. V.H.’s link to the King interview is a prime example.

It is a success because: “x million of people who had no insurance are now covered”, OR “my wife who could not have life saving surgery was saved thanks to Obamacare”.

All the “rationalizations” of success are based on emotion. Well I should say most. There are those who are currently claiming that health care costs have declined BECAUSE of the ACA.

Because they lie does not logically dictate that the action is bad for everyone. It could simply mean that the people were not given enough time to see the light.

In this case, however, the lie was necessary as was the ram rodding of the bill through backdoors and without time for Congress Critters to review the details. The CBO could not have scored the bill properly because it was not given adequate time to review the final.

In the next election you will see many start calling for ACA repeal and replacement with a SINGLE PAYER system. Because it will after all, solve the problems created by the ACA.

Update: Either Gruber makes a lot of “speak-os” or he thinks Americans are really dumb …. and therefore exploitable:

“It’s a very clever, you know, basic exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American voter,” Gruber, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said during a speech at the University of Rhode Island in November 2012.

He was discussing what is known as the Cadillac tax and how it came into being.

In an effort to add a cost-control measure to Obamacare, former Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, who Gruber called a “hero,” successfully pushed through a 40 percent excise tax on insurance companies for plans that cost more than $10,200 for individuals and $27,000 for families.

This was an alternative to putting a cap on tax breaks employers provide employees for health insurance plans, which, according to Gruber, the public mistook for a tax increase rather than the removal of a tax break.

“You just can’t get through, it’s just politically impossible,” Gruber said during his talk.

Let’s not forget that when Gruber calls voters stupid, it can’t be applied to those who opposed ObamaCare on the very same grounds as he states in these videos. Critics had made these arguments all along about the deceptive structure of the bill, and the lies being told to cover it up. Gruber’s talking about the Obama coalition in these remarks.

It seems there was an attempt yo deceive the CBO as well. The only voters that seemed to have been fooled are indeed Obsmabots.

I would like to see current numbers of those uninsured. With all the people leaving the workforce and lost jobs, it has to be higher than when Bush left office. I’d bet the numbers are 50 million plus now. Funny, don’t hear a thing about those numbers, when 6 years ago they were repeated daily.

Voting itself is evil and stupid as it is demanding violations of rights and enslavement for yourself, your children, and your neighbors, as well as demanding genocide and a long list of atrocities upon millions abroad.

Every time I hear a voter complain about government, I think.. ” Idiot ”

We have every resource available to peacefully and efficiently manage our entire planet, yet people choose the most violent inefficient ways possible.

People are economically illiterate, and are trained to be that way purposely.

It is not so much that people are “stupid”, but that people are lazy thinkers. It is easy to pander to quick methodologies, like theft, to solve a problem of their own and even better when you mask that theft with a lie as some social good as “egalitarianism”.

It’s call “pedestrian economics” and almost all of it is wrong. But people don’t care, even here on SUFA. No matter the repetition, it will not break through because the myth and fantasy always beats reality when reality is difficult and the myth promises easy living.

Sorry Flaggie, but I was TOTALLY against the ACA, because it was an economic disaster. Many, including D13, posted the crap that it was on numerous occasions. I will admit that I’m not the wisest on economics, SUFA has helped a lot, you included 🙂

Yes, I’m aware human sexuality is a very common thing. Doesn’t mean I care to discuss my personal preferences with the SUFA crowd 🙂 but hey I like men so I really don’t have to choose-I can have either or both-reciprocate or not-have no problem receiving or giving pleasure-I and I think most people get enjoyment from doing both-it’s nice to satisfy the one you love and it isn’t selfish to enjoy receiving. The whole article is total BS-an attempt to claim straight women are some how sexually repressed because they are having sex with men.

Sorta like they did with gay parenting-they didn’t just claim that gays were as good at parenting as a man and woman they tried to claim they were actually better. Now I guess they want to make that claim about sex too.

I found the article more like typical Lefty BS! While I’m no expert, I have never been with a women who DIDN’T want and enjoy oral sex, EVER! There is no such thing as a man who doesn’t want it, and frankly, I have never met a woman who doesn’t want and enjoy it. Intercourse rarely provides the climax that a woman desires, that is a proven scientific fact (I have studied this issue).

But the true and unique bond between a man and a women is intercourse. Although it has been perverted and abused, the bond between two that are in love with one another is proven that intercourse is the ultimate event that keeps the bond strong.

Lesbians, would always like oral better than normal people, not sure about male gays, but I’m sure they like it too. Didn’t you post some pics from San Francisco that were quite explicit on the subject with male gays?

The whole idea is the share and express your love for one another. Sex is a great means of doing so. And if it is not of mutual enjoyment, it kind of defeats the purpose. It is no longer sharing, but receiving or taking, not so much giving. And I say that in no specific terms, meaning it isn’t specific to oral sex.

That’s why I find the results of the study interesting. It’s not really about oral, but the idea of reciprocation.

” The whole article is total BS-an attempt to claim straight women are some how sexually repressed because they are having sex with men. ”

I didn’t exactly get that from the article. This statement I found a little odd though;

” many of the women who have sex with men and prefer penetration felt that oral sex requires a greater level of vulnerability,…”

I am unsure of the context of ‘vulnerability’. It seems to me that a couple should feel very comfortable, should feel a deeper level (no pun intended) of intimacy in that neither should feel ‘vulnerable’.

Maybe that is where the idea of being (as you describe) repressed comes from. I hope I would never make a woman feel vulnerable or repressed. Personally, it is why I do things like not being one to make the first move when venturing into that stage of a relationship where sex is in the near future. I figure that when she is ready to share herself, she will let me know. It is all about her feeling ‘right’ about it.

Anyhow, the article is a good one – is good insight into the typical female mindset on sexuality.

” Sorta like they did with gay parenting-they didn’t just claim that gays were as good at parenting as a man and woman they tried to claim they were actually better. ”

It’s funny that you mention that. Do you remember a conversation several months ago where we were discussing gay parents and how you thought they shouldn’t be able to adopt?

Well, the whole time we were having that discussion, I was sitting at the table smoking a joint with a lesbian and having a very heart felt meaningful conversation about parenting.

What is even more interesting is that both conversations occurred completely independent of each other. What I mean is that I didn’t tell her I was discussing gay parenting with you. (Well, not until after a couple of hours anyway.) My conversation with her started from her expressing her annoyance from having to listen to her neighbor disrespecting a child, yelling and talking down to him.

She was being very passionate about how precious children are and how they deserve love and respect, how they deserve a good stable loving environment, etc. She made some very intelligent points and it was apparent that she would be a good mom if she were to ever get pregnant by one of her male ‘friends’ or decide to adopt.

And the whole time, you were basically bashing the idea of gay parents and how it wasn’t fair to the child.

I thought the dynamics taking place was most interesting. ..Here you and I (heterosexuals) were talking about gay parenting, me defending them while stating that I think a hetero couple is optimum, while you argued against. Her(a lesbian) and I(hetero) were talking about parenting in general, which started in regard to a (hetero) male being an asshole to a kid because he was in much need of discipline. Neither her or I have children. I want children, but only when I can be in the position to do it right. You have grown children. And her neighbor is raising one.

All four of us are about what we see as what is in the best interest of children.

“I didn’t exactly get that from the article.” Let me focus your eyes on these words, especially the last line and the words normative sexual expectations:

“While there are certainly other explanations for the 30 percent difference, like simple personal preference, the larger issue seems to be one of normative sexual expectations, especially for women who have sex with men. Scarcella sums it up well: it “all relates back to misogyny and how women feel about their bodies.” ”

Now look at the definition of Misogyny:”dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women.”

They also chose to use the word vulnerable:”susceptible to physical or emotional attack or harm.
“we were in a vulnerable position”
synonyms: helpless, defenseless, powerless, impotent, weak, susceptible

What does not work is GOVERNMENT and the State. Look around you at its disasters.

What you want is perfection and unless you get it, you keep making the same disasters, pile up the bodies of innocent people under the pretense that evil is better now then the foibles of men trying to do something better.

Any human action will create problems. The biggest and most dangerous problem of mankind is the State. Solve that one, and the rest are trivial.

It is the notion of authority that forms the true locus of dispute between libertarianism and other political philosophies.

Libertarians are skeptical about authority, whereas most accept the state’s authority in more or less the terms in which the state claims it.

This is what enables most to endorse governmental behavior that would otherwise appear to violate individual rights: nonlibertarians assume that most of the moral constraints that apply to other agents do not apply to the state.

….

I have suggested that the best explanation for the inclination to ascribe authority to the state lies in a collection of nonrational biases that would operate whether or not there were any legitimate authorities.

Most people never pause to question the notion of political authority, but once it is examined, the idea of a group of people with a special right to command everyone else fairly dissolves.

What is necessary is for the likes of you to offer a positive argument on why you want to keep the State – not is some fairy tale of what you dream the State is, but based on what the State is in reality.

Provide why you agree the State should slaughter hundreds of millions of people for it to exist.

Provide why you agree the State should imprison millions upon millions of people who have harmed no one.

You cannot defend the State on any moral ground. Therefore, the State needs to go.

What comes after that becomes a dialogue from principle, not Peter Pan stories or nightmares.

The reason that anarcho-capitalism will not work “today” is because the world does not hold the same moral and ethical principles. Note that in the discussion this is a premise. It is in fact assumed in all explanations of anarchy or libertarianism.

I do not seek nor demand perfection. I recognize that even if the ethic were widespread there will always be bad players. Much of this can be handled locally or by individuals. But in the world we currently live the individual cannot defend against invasion by some tyrant who controls a State military. I have provided you with several recent examples of how communities were overrun by tyrants with greater firepower.

Which brings me to your fallacy of false premise. You ask me to build a case for killing or imprisoning millions when I do not support the killing or imprisoning of millions. That is if they are in fact “innocent”.

Now for the State and local level “State”. I support the same principle, but in the form of Police. The reason is the danger of competing private firms trying to dispense justice on behalf of opposing clients. The reality is that such arrangements lead to clan wars. How is justice dispensed in a society where your wealth determines which Law Enforcement you get compared to the pauper?

Even the ancient examples of common law involved an accepted centralized authority to catch and bring criminals before the “judges”. Although it was also common for the accused to come on their own due to cultural pressures. The price of not showing up to trial/hearing was to be ostracized from the clan.

As I have explained many times to you. Govt MUST be held to the same moral and ethical principles as the people. Thus my argument for govt/State is in fact principle based, as well as consistent with reality. You will never agree because you define Govt/State in a way that deliberately precludes such consideration. The author of the above article does the same thing. He quickly claims that Govt. does not adhere to the same principles. The accurate statement should be that it “may not” due to the corrupting influence of absolute power.

The State will behave just as other men/wormen behave in a Society. If the core is good then Govt will be good. If bad or flawed then you get your standard Govt. It may be good in the beginning but the Absolute Power will corrupt it. But this is true for most men.

So in the end, the need to remain diligent and to make adjustments is equally necessary. Whether dealing with a State or free men.

The problem with having the State is the existence of men seeking absolute power over others. But eliminating the State does not eliminate those men. So those men will establish Govt. soon after it is abolished. Thus we are faced with a constant swing of the pendulum. That is the REALITY of the human experience at this point in time.

Defense from what?
Given there are countries with no army – and happen to be among the richest in the world…

Given that in the guise of “defense”, the State exercises its worse violence on its own citizens shows the contradiction of your claim.

Further, you infer that a “common” defense exists for everyone the same, justifying your theft upon those that do not wish such a common defense. Again, you may claim “well, you don’t have to participate” while at the same time you often agree that without forcing all to participate, your “common” defense cannot exist. Again, another empty contradiction.

You continue to ply a falsehood and a bizarre non-fact that you pretend in your weird head is a fact.

Nowhere is it necessary that the “whole world” needs to hold the “same” moral principles. That is just utter nonsense. Given that the “whole world” did not agree to founding principles of the Americas – to you must mean it could not have risen – yet it did.

Yes you do demand perfection. Read your own post “the whole world”. That is your whole case. If EVERYONE can’t see freedom, you believe it is impossible for SOME to achieve it.

You further ply another nonsense. That evil men can produce more firepower then free men. Talk about a false premise!!

They are “innocent”. By your own bizarre circular reasoning, you make what the State claims is criminal to be “criminal” therefore requiring the State to enforce.

The Gov’t cannot be held to the same level of moral principles – IT EXISTS TO EXERCISE VIOLENCE ON NON-VIOLENT PERSONS TO ENFORCE ITS EDICTS. This is an absolute requirement, hence, is CONTRARY to your claim.

You want a principled gov’t, but it cannot exist in such a form. Hence, you constantly contradict your own principle base.

I am not articulating a principle. I am stating a “definition” of Govt.

It is in fact a monopoly on the use of “legal” force. It is the “legality” of that force that distinguishes its use of force from the people in general.

When the people decide what force is legal you have Liberty. When the Govt itself dictates what force is legal you have tyranny. But the definition of Govt does not change. Only the authority by which it acts.

It was the author who stated the premise that all men hold the same principle.

And yes, men who seek immoral use of force will gather greater military power. How else do you explain the USA as the greatest military power the world has ever seen??

Now lets assume that the USA suddenly saw the light and disbanded this massive force. Are you claiming that some other tyrant or group of tyrants would not pose a threat??

How would people of our “region” defend themselves against China or Russia or even Mexico if they decided to invade us with their “military”??

How well are those armed militias in Iraq standing up against the “military” armament of ISIS?

You presume that free men will develop a defense adequate to prevent invasion or subjugation by others. Yet the minute they do you create the same threat to freedom. Men with the power to use against others.

So, if they do not hold and adhere to the same moral/ethical principles you will get tyranny.

No, he states that a moral principle can be held by all men.
It does not state that all men will hold such a principle.

Again, stupidity. You argue that immoral men, whose character is contrary to the trust necessary to organize, can organize better then moral men, whose character is fundamental to the trust necessary.

You further argue by pointing to an existence that people have acquiesced as if it is undeniable that no other existence is possible. By such an argument, again, you believe change does not happen. Yet it does.

Because of your superficial understanding and lack of fundamental principles you do not understand how such a violent force became such, hence, you have no understanding of how such a violent force is unnecessary.

Yes, how is the armies of your proclaimed greatness of nations doing against a rag-tag assortment of volunteers! Even before your very eyes you remain blind.

I do not presume. It is a fact as exampled all over the world today. You presume such fact does not exist.

Again, you preach perfection – no where is it necessary that ALL need to be principled for principled people to gather. What utter claptrap.

“Again, stupidity. You argue that immoral men, whose character is contrary to the trust necessary to organize, can organize better then moral men, whose character is fundamental to the trust necessary”

Actually evil men are quite good at “organizing”. It is this trait that has often been used by innocents to agree to increasing Govt power. The “organizing” power results in greater efficiency. At least at first. They do not see how this decision left unwatched will lead to loss of even more liberty down the road.

History is filled with evil men who managed to organize huge armies and invade innocent people who were not as well organized.

Organizing an army does not require trust among men. It only requires a cooperative public.

No, you said that they are “BETTER” at it, which is fundamentally FALSE.

The only advantage evil has over good is that evil “cheats” – they shoot the guy in the back (using Western movie analogy).

No doubt, immoral men have no problem chopping off arms of children, whereas a moral man would not. This is an advantage – viciousness – which does quell resistance where the cost of resistance outweighs the price

But moral men ARE BETTER, so much better that they do not need to chop off children’s arms to “win” – when the matter counts, like Freedom.

This is the only way such evil men gain the power you see. The cost they inflict is so much higher then the loss of “pennies”. All political power of evil is a slow boiling – taking small infractions upon freedom over generations – and not from “nothing to tyranny” over night.

How would people of our “region” defend themselves against China or Russia or even Mexico if they decided to invade us with their “military”??

“Why would they?”

Excellent, Gman! You hit the question!

JAC’s ilk’s argument always starts with an irrationality. A bunch of guys organize themselves to attack, risking their lives and fortune and of their families and own nation …. because, for the hell of it. Therefore, we gotta do the same.

No.
There is no action without a cause. Even evil guys don’t do such stupid things as such things often go really bad. It has to be something really big and its almost always a ratcheting effect caused by JAC’s ilk in the first place.

“We need an army to defend from a fantasy that these guys will attack if we don’t have an army!”

The benefits of freedom are therefore not confined to the free – or, at least, a man does not benefit mainly from those aspects of freedom which he himself takes advantage of.

There can be no doubt that in history unfree majorities have benefited from the existence of free minorities and that today unfree societies benefit from what they obtain and learn from free societies.

Of course the benefits we derive from the freedom of others become greater as the number of those who can exercise freedom increases. The argument for the freedom of some therefore applies to the freedom of all.

Interesting that even the author agrees that voting is useless. Local government, where changes are much easier to make, still, dependent of the location, are just as corrupt as the Feds. Our natural Rights seem to be under constant attack and far to many people can’t seem to be able to just mind their own F-ing business. Just like the health insurance issue, as soon as the government gets involved, it just gets worse and worse of a problem. The 8000000 lb gorilla isn’t just going to go away peacefully, it never will. Maybe when the nukes start to fly, then people will wake up and realize how ignorant they are.

Did you watch the videos that BF posted? In one of them the point is made that over 70% of the population “abstained” from voting in one of the phony elections. This has been proposed as the tipping point where not voting destroys “credibility” of the elected.

So what was the affect? NOTHING.

The Govt was still elected and still tried to impose its will upon the people. It was not the act of NOT voting that undermined that Govt, but when the 70% took to the streets.

Now what would have happened if the 70% had voted for the OTHER option?

You have identified the proper problem several times. It is not the act of voting but the act of choosing those who run. As long as a few elitists select the candidates then you have few choices. This is why voting creates minor changes.

“So is not voting also pointless? Does it also continue the status quo?”

It is pointless because it maintains the status quo

You argue that voting causes change. It does not. It is POINTLESS to causing change. If you like where you are, keep voting = who you vote for is irrelevant, just vote

If not then you are in fact claiming that not voting will cause a desired affect.

Correct. Not voting attacks legitimacy – which is why they vote in N. Korea and why Hitler went to the vote every 4 years. That is why such regimes make it a law that you had to vote.

What else is necessary?

An idea

You can’t beat something with nothing. At some point, a principle is required to root a change. Once the status quo is illegitimate, the arguments in its favor are dismissed, allowing new ideas to take hold

If your idea is the same as the old idea, which it is, you will be equally dismissed.

Haven’t seen the videos. I look at our Federal government and the two political parties as nothing more than a criminal cartel. I have made many suggestions in the past on what I think could be done to fix the problems and keep them fixed (a toothless government who only manages certain aspects, such as roads, military etc. but with no legal power to make laws).

The solution is becoming ACTIVE not withdrawing from the game. Yes, this is especially true in North Korea.

The game goes to those who play. Maybe that’s the problem, it’s a game. To the winner goes the spoils. The losers are thus screwed. No Thanks, not the kind of game I want to play.

In todays world, I stand on Flag’s side, he avails governments as evil, and frankly, it’s impossible to dispute. There is a better way and right now it’s not through elections and illusions of change when we all know the entire process is fixed.

Eventually, our government will fall apart under it’s own weight. How that happens is yet to be determined. My guess is that it will include a lot of innocent deaths.

On a different note, the ground is snow covered. Tomorrow is last day of archery season (I need a break) with two weeks to get ready for rifle season, which is two weeks long. All is well beyond that. I certainly hope that all is well in JAC’s world as well 🙂

Son in law has heard from some Marine buddies that this may be a good time to invest in Iraqi currency. Figured you two are my safest bets on good info. Have you or any other SUFAs heard anything like this?

If there exists a case where currency investing is so rich, the guys with real big money would be there faster then light speed. You will be crushed by their manipulations.

If they are not there, there is no rich to be made. You will be crushed by rushing into hell’s acres of finance ripoff.

There is no market on earth for the “little guy”. It’s all chewed up by the crap-ilists and mercantilists. For any investment to pay off for the little guy, it has to be local and personal. Invest in your own company, or the company you work for.

The former, you control your own success.
The latter, you should have all the necessary information to make a valuable judgement. If the company you work for is not worthy of investment, why are you investing your life-time working there? If you are investing your time there, because the company is worth it, so it is worth your other additional financial inputs.

Little else is worthwhile. It is all manipulated and stacked. It is a card game so crooked, even the crooks get screwed.

What are you saying..don’t invest? These kids are all mid twenties, married with homes and small kids…401ks getting matched..still wanting to save for their futures. Smart enough to know SS will prob not do the trick for them…so wut up?

Agreed….leave world currency alone…especially Iraq and any in that area of the world. Unless you are very savvy, and you watch and play currencies……there are no long term currencies that are viable….You can play the currency market, if you want, but that does require constant monitoring and it is short term. And to play in the big game of currency, you must also stay abreast if inflation, shipping markets, and foreign commercial transportation costs…..and even then……..be cognizant of manipulation from speculators.

On 10 April 2014, the USS Donald Cook entered the waters of the Black Sea and on 12 April a Russian Su-24 tactical bomber flew over the vessel triggering an incident that, according to several media reports, completely demoralized its crew, so much so that the Pentagon issued a protest.

The USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) is a 4th generation guided missile destroyer whose key weapons are Tomahawk cruise missiles with a range of up to 2,500 kilometers, and capable of carrying nuclear explosives. This ship carries 56 Tomahawk missiles in standard mode, and 96 missiles in attack mode.

The US destroyer is equipped with the most recent Aegis Combat System. It is an integrated naval weapons systems which can link together the missile defense systems of all vessels embedded within the same network, so as to ensure the detection, tracking and destruction of hundreds of targets at the same time. In addition, the USS Donald Cook is equipped with 4 large radars, whose power is comparable to that of several stations. For protection, it carries more than fifty anti-aircraft missiles of various types.

Meanwhile, the Russian Su-24 that buzzed the USS Donald Cook carried neither bombs nor missiles but only a basket mounted under the fuselage, which, according to the Russian newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta, contained a Russian electronic warfare device called Khibiny.

As the Russian jet approached the US vessel, the electronic device disabled all radars, control circuits, systems, information transmission, etc. on board the US destroyer. In other words, the all-powerful Aegis system, now hooked up — or about to be — with the defense systems installed on NATO’s most modern ships was shut down, as turning off the TV set with the remote control.

The Russian Su-24 then simulated a missile attack against the USS Donald Cook, which was left literally deaf and blind. As if carrying out a training exercise, the Russian aircraft — unarmed — repeated the same maneuver 12 times before flying away.

After that, the 4th generation destroyer immediately set sail towards a port in Romania.

Since that incident, which the Atlanticist media have carefully covered up despite the widespread reactions sparked among defense industry experts, no US ship has ever approached Russian territorial waters again.

According to some specialized media, 27 sailors from the USS Donald Cook requested to be relieved from active service.

Vladimir Balybine — director of the research center on electronic warfare and the evaluation of so-called “visibility reduction” techniques attached to the Russian Air Force Academy — made the following comment: “The more a radio-electronic system is complex, the easier it is to disable it through the use of electronic warfare.”

In short, “back to the drawing board!”

Problem: it takes about seven years for the Pentagon to design and deploy a new cybersecurity system. As for missile guidance systems, it takes even longer.

If you want to know how much bang for the taxpayer’s buck the Pentagon gets, begin here.

This is blind man’s bluff. The Pentagon is the blind man.

The Pentagon’s strategy is to play dumb. “Incident? What incident?”

Congressional hearings? Don’t hold your breath.

Now Russia’s defense minister says that Russian bombers will soon start patrolling the Gulf of Mexico.

Technology has a way of becoming useless. They’re coming out with smart guns that are deadly accurate, until the next guy figures out how to turn them off. Major power grid failure? How long would it take for half of the US population to die without power? A month maybe? I like old school ways, although I use current technology, I have old school stuff, just in case. 😉

GMAn…you need to pay more attention to your local government…..In the last three years, since major fires have wiped out whole grids and showed the weakness of power grids, Texas and other states, have initiated power grids withing their own boundaries and will use them as a strategic reserve.

My power supply and that of my neighbors and for the town of Marianville Pa goes right over my garden (remember, I hunt a power line). There are NO other options available. Texas has it’s own power grid, that’s well known. Here in the country, it’s simple, one source or the generator. Most folks here have generators, at the suggestion of the electric company 🙂

Very simple explanation……shoot them down if you do not want them there but expect the same when you are in their backyard. No one, including the US, is going to push the nuke option. There would be no winners..and in today’s time, there is no preemptive strikes that would cripple any major power from a response.

This is the cold war all over again…I wonder what is taking PUTIN so long…..

The following post is guest-authored by a soldier who is currently deployed in service to his country.

To whom it may concern:

It has come to my attention that many people have been directing some of their anger about our country’s foreign policy toward the members of the military themselves rather than to our political leaders who dictate what our policy is.

As a soldier, this saddens and upsets me. I joined the military not because I agreed with the politicians, but because I felt a duty to serve our beautiful country and noble people. Our way of life is worth protecting, and it requires that men like me make personal sacrifices so that others don’t have to. Freedom needs to be preserved and protected from those who seek to destroy it, and they are legion. The modern world is complex, and what we have here in our country is attractive to despots, terrorists, tyrants, and religious extremists. They will use any means possible to enslave and control us.

I don’t want to spend my life in the military. I never really wanted to join in the first place, but the economy was such that there simply weren’t any other options that came close to providing the benefits, pay, and security for my family. I have children, and I did what I had to do to make sure they had food on the table and a warm place to sleep. I joined the military so they won’t have to. I want a better life for them, and the surest way to provide that is through national service.

If you haven’t served in the military, you won’t be able to understand the evil that exists outside our peaceful borders. I’ve looked into the eyes of our enemies. I’ve seen the atrocities they commit. I’ve heard their anger. The peace and tranquility you experience at home is the result of the willingness of brave soldiers to pursue evil wherever it takes hold.

I do not mean to say that our soldiers are perfect and always honorable. Of course there are mistakes. Of course innocent people die, and it is always a tragedy when they do. But we do our best to minimize those deaths as much as possible. Sometimes those deaths are out of our control. We don’t always know what is behind every door, and we can’t afford to assume the best of every situation.

Some have criticized soldiers for their willingness to imprison our enemies without trial or charges. I have worked at a detainment complex where some of these people are held. I won’t say the name of the facility, but you will no doubt be familiar with it, as it is probably the most famous of this type of detainment center. I know for a fact that some of the people that were held there were innocent of any crime, and I did what I could to lighten their burden. If I wasn’t there, some other soldier could have been there and he may not have been so kind. We had a lot of people come through, and I didn’t always know their fate in the end. That information was above my pay grade. There was nothing I could do about it. I always tried to treat them with respect and dignity. Of course I couldn’t help them escape, because I would have faced disciplinary charges, and they probably would have been found and killed. This would help nobody. From my position I could at least make their lives a little more tolerable.

I’ve never killed anybody; I’ve never even fired my weapon at another person. I won’t follow orders which go against our national principles. I have taken an oath to our country, our flag, and our Führer, and I will not violate that oath.

Now that I’ve laid out my defense of my chosen occupation, let me offer some solutions.

Those who criticize our troops are always welcome to find another country to live in. Nobody is stopping anybody from leaving. Granted, there are certain checks and procedures that need to be followed, but that is only for security; those who have nothing to hide have nothing to fear. Those who get disappeared by the Gestapo are criminals and represent a danger to our pure nation.

If you don’t wish to leave, I encourage you to write to your politicians. They are the ones who make the decisions; they have the power to change things. Our political freedoms allow us to have access to the legislators, and to vote out those who don’t represent the voice of our unified people. We are only their tools and cannot make changes on our own. It is they who determine the orders; we only follow them.

I may not like the stench of the incinerators, I may not agree with every race law, and I may not believe fully in the final solution, but the only reason you enjoy your freedom is that rough men like me are willing to do violence to protect you. It is our willingness to put aside our personal lives, sacrifice our liberties, and deploy to the harshest places on earth that allows you to be comfortable at home, to enjoy the blessings of living in the greatest nation on earth, and to have a peaceful and prosperous holiday season. Don’t forget, as you prepare the Weihnachtsplätzchen this Christmas, that we, the National Socialist soldiers of der Führer Adolf Hitler are away so that you can walk down the Reichsstraße to the Rhine in peace.

They can always pay. They can monetize the debt.
You know what that means. They will do that for awhile, walk the tightrope, then stop.

Government defaults. All that means is “opps, sorry, no money for you”.
All that means if you were stupid to loan money to government, you got the age old lesson of consequences of stupidity. Don’t worry, though, few learn (see Argentina).

But US is not Argentina, so the consequences of “oopps, you stupid” will be much more profound. It will undermine the public’s belief of government largess. It could be the end of Federalism.

They are not stupid men. They are evil men, but that doesn’t necessarily make them stupid.

More likely, it is “kick the can”. They will continue to prop up the system for as long as possible in a race between its failure and their departure to the grave. “Not on my watch, I hope!” is their mantra.

They can’t stop the show, they can only continue to play to diminishing audience. Maybe this generation the curtain will fall, or maybe the next or even maybe the one after that.

But one day, the show will close, and it will be those guys that will hang from lamp posts.
But today, the show must go on.

I wonder what happens when the left wing KKK battles the left wing Black Panthers in the streets of Ferguson? Who will the left wing media root for? Is the KKK (which I thought were extinct) still full of hard core Democrats?

“The only proper purpose of a government is to protect man’s rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence. A proper government is only a policeman, acting as an agent of man’s self-defense, and, as such, may resort to force only against those who start the use of force. The only proper functions of a government are: the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective law. But a government that initiates the employment of force against men who had forced no one, the employment of armed compulsion against disarmed victims, is a nightmare infernal machine designed to annihilate morality: such a government reverses its only moral purpose and switches from the role of protector to the role of man’s deadliest enemy, from the role of policeman to the role of a criminal vested with the right to the wielding of violence against victims deprived of the right of self-defense. Such a government substitutes for morality the following rule of social conduct: you may do whatever you please to your neighbor, provided your gang is bigger than his.”

Such proclamations fail because you infuse the entity with the power to define the law.
It is still objective – from its point of view – and as always with no exceptions in all human history this power perverts society.

Actually in the description above it is the people who identify “objective” laws and then impose those laws upon the Govt. Gov’t cannot step beyond the explicit authority it is granted, in other words DELEGATED.

Well I guess your final fallacy would put us in the same boat now, wouldn’t it!

You do realize, don’t you, that this argument flies in the face of your prior arguments about mankinds ability to reason, discover philosophical principles and to change our behavior, from savage to civilized.

If there was any doubt as to why the Dems rushed through the ACA, backdoor and all, then remember the warnings about how once implemented it would never be repealed. In fact, the Progressive mind would rationalize how it now needed to be fixed, eventually leading to Govt Health Care.

Well here is just how obnoxious and repulsive the left is at their propaganda and public manipulation game. Hand out free cookies then threaten riots in the streets if those cookies are taken away.

I posted this story earlier, but I wanted to add something. If many of you recall, we had a huge debate over Conceal carry permits. Some were for, some, including myself, totally against. There is not one shred of evidence that has shown the permits are needed, other than government control. It’s, in my mind, backdoor registration. This is a current issue in New York (yes, Liberal land). http://godfatherpolitics.com/18477/buffalo-police-confiscate-guns-dead-people/

If anyone can come up with one logical reason why you believe permits are a good thing, please post it, I’m up for a polite debate on the matter 🙂

People have property rights. Government does not have a right to regulate your property.

Firearms are property.

Unless you are using your property to violate others, no one should have much of anything to say about you and your firearms. It is none of their business what you do with your property unless it effects them in some way. (Like your family or room mate, coworker, etc.)

A gun as an heirloom is like any other heirloom, and should be treated as such. Government using excuses to regulate or restrict gun ownership or confiscate, is not only a violation of property rights, but a violation of the right to self defense.

People have the right to defense of themselves family and property, by any and all means necessary and available. Restricting someone’s ability to defend against a potential threat is violating said right and should not be tolerated.

I agree 100% Very well put. This is how Liberal’s think, everything is theirs when you die (death tax, etc) I believe this law in NY also violates many laws and probably several parts of the Constitution. None of their damn business. I’m fortunate to live in an area that don’t do that kind of BS. By the way, my invite remains open. Rifle (deer) season is coming up and we always have room for friends! It’s a fun time of year with some great food and partying!

” This is how Liberal’s think, everything is theirs when you die (death tax, etc)”

I can’t disagree. Although I tend to not see things in terms of left/right and political parties. There are a lot who support the polar opposite of idealism recognizing rights.

” I believe this law in NY also violates many laws and probably several parts of the Constitution.”

From my perspective, NY law and the US Constitution are irrelevant garbage. Whatever a piece of parchment says or doesn’t say, people still have the right to defense of themselves family and property, by any and all means necessary and/or available.

” None of their damn business. I’m fortunate to live in an area that don’t do that kind of BS.”

I also live in ‘gun-friendly’ place. The law here says I can be fairly liberal with guns. Not that it is necessarily relevant. If someone tries to forcefully regulate the use of my property, I will answer their demands with force. Living in a gun-friendly environment is a way of avoiding such a conflict of interest and/or confrontation.

” By the way, my invite remains open. Rifle (deer) season is coming up and we always have room for friends! It’s a fun time of year with some great food and partying! ”

The study’s claims are bad enough, as in unlikely accurate, but please look at all the comments. Great lesson in confirmation bias creating absolute “findings” and “facts” from a study that provides “statistical” probability with substantial caveats.

We have come to a point where real science is simply ignored or its findings twisted by the political propaganda in order to rationalize all the pre-conceived opinions.